No, not like the DTs.  I mean, like leaving.

I'm not leaving GS permanently, by any means.  Just that you may have noticed that I rarely post here, outside the hockey forums, anymore.  Part of that is time.  Part of that is the realization that I have better things to do than to waste my time on video-game message boards, like play video games.  And part of it is that I've just plain run out of things to say.

I mean, I used to be a semi-regular at Goose's Garage.  Now?  The place is dead, and the discussions are largely following the same paths they have for the last two years, and it becomes tiresome fast.  I don't enrage like I once did, and I no longer need to release like that.  Most things, I either don't care about, or I can't be bothered to argue about yet again.

So, yeah, if anyone's still looking for me (assuming everyone didn't disappear after the month-long downtime: that's what did it for me), NHLT or NHLU.

I got 19 loonies, toonies, and quarters in cards (because I'm turning 19--get it?), Super Mario World (GBA), Far Cry (PC), and a belated NHL 2K6 (Xbox), thanks to the loveliness of Amazon's free shipping. I also bought myself an Oilers home jersey, which I wore to my first day of school in Calgary. Somehow, I got more cheers than jeers. :)

Good day all around. KFC, cake, family, banter, all that good stuff. Not as exciting as turning 18, since Alberta is an "18 province" (for drinking/bars/whatever), but otherwise good.

http://hockey.fantasysports.yahoo.com/hockey/327/12/

I'm insanely happy with this draft, especially given it's the first time I've ever done FH, anyway, anyhow, anywhere. Only one flub (in the 18th round :roll: ) which will be rectified by the start of the season. I didn't get every big-name player I wanted (at 15th pick, it's kinda hard), but I got nearly every littler-name player I got, and even a few names I hadn't even heard of, but seemed good on paper. Also, watch out for Brad Boyes. He'll have 50 points, I guarantee it.

And so kick it old-school I will, with the vintage 1943 Habs jersey in my avatar. Bow before me, for I am root! :P

In other news, it turns out I have four more years, counting this one, before Student Loans tells me to screw myself. Let's all give a big Ken and Gerard "Yaaaaay!" (Crowd: "Yaaaaay!") The Amazing Race 3 really did own, except for the final-episode standings, which should have been reversed.

And finally, I am both nervous and excited about fantasy hockey. Amazing the kinds of things you notice once you're tuned into them, if ya know what I mean. ;)

Why? Simply because I wasn't planning on buying one until it hit C$200 anyway.

Basically, just an update to say that work is finally (finally) getting somewhere, and I may yet have that first-draft manuscript done by the end of next week like I'd anticipated. It'll be a breakneck week, and will likely result in a lot of late hours. So for those boards I frequent, don't be surprised if I drop off the face of the planet for a week. In fact, be surprised if I don't.

Oh, and Az? BOOYAH! And just for good measure, NYAH! and w00t! (Ah, the one advantage of cheering for three teams. And yes, I know that last one kinda sucks, but it's Rexall Place. Trust me.)

So it finally happened--my GBA arrived. I love the pristine look of new hardware, and the Cobalt Blue GBA is absolutely awesome to look at. Unfortunately, I didn't get a chance to open it until late today so I can't use it, in all likelihood, until tomorrow. So, for now, I'm left to read the game manuals, and I've learned something rather disappointing--GB games don't come in cases anymore. Allegedly, they haven't for a very long time, but it's definitely news to me. So, I'll have to buy some Mad Catz cases, or something like that, later this week/weekend. On the plus side, this gives me time to finish 1984 before getting going with my new toy. :D

I, like several other GameSpot users, have emailed Jack Thompson recently about his blatant logical fallacies in opposition to video games. Without resorting to inflammatory remarks or threats, I managed to elicit from him the simple truth: he wants to destroy the video-game industry, presumably without any regard for the rights of businessmen to conduct business, artists to create art, or parents to decide what forms and pieces of entertainment are right for their children. The man is a fascist, a monster, and the sooner he's stopped, the better.

---

Original email (11:06 MT)

Dear Mr. Thompson:

In the last week, your efforts against a multi-billion-dollar industry
have caught my attention, and it must be said that your means of doing so
is, to say the least, devoid of any persuasive power or intellectual
honesty. Let's start with your blatant and unfounded ad hominem attacks
on ESA president Doug Lowenstein. In an open letter, you state:

"Doug Lowenstein embarrasses each and every one of you when he holds forth
about what the 'Founders' intended when they drafted the Bill of Rights.
For Doug, the Founders are GTA's Tommy Vercetti and Carl Johnson. Doug
never met a pixilated [sic] prostitute he didn't like, and I'm sure James
Madison would be impressed."

For the time being, I will put aside your lack of understanding of the
ESRB's ratings, which correlate with those of the MPAA, and rating
process, which does not include commented-out code that cannot be accessed
without third-party modifications which violate the End-User Licensing
Agreement. On what basis do you make such claims about Mr. Lowenstein?
Do you have some way of demonstrating that he believes fictional
characters spawned your country more than 200 years before their creation?
Do you have some way of showing that Mr. Lowenstein enjoys the services
of a "pixilated [sic] prostitute"? Or are these merely sound bites
cynically designed to grab the attention of those who will take any excuse
they need to clamp down on any freedom that goes against their personal
morals?

Next, let's look at your claim that "John Lee Malvo, was compelled by John
Muhammad to train on the sniper video game, Halo, switched to sniper-mode
or God-mode, to suppress his inhibition to kill." This not only shows an
ignorance of the game Halo itself, as it is not a sniper game at all, but
of how firing a gun works. You see, without even firing a gun in my life,
I realize, from a simple knowledge of physics and biology, that video
games are a poor model of how to fire a gun, because they do not take into
account things like unsteady hands, breathing, or recoil. Even games that
use light guns to model the firing are still not very accurate, because
they are very liberal in what they accept as a "hit", and still do not
address most of these issues. You also fail to realize something
fundamental about human psychology: actions taken in video games by a
sane, well-raised person do not translate into similar actions outside the
virtual realm, because they understand the difference between the real and
the fantastic; similarly, playing in "God mode" does not amplify these
fictitious effects. If watching a violent movie does not inspire a person
to kill, why would playing a violent video game? A sane person can
distinguish either from reality.

Furthermore, trying to extrapolate one or two killers who happened to play
video games into an entire population that kills because they play video
games is perhaps the greatest logical fallacy I've ever heard. As stated
off the top, video games are a multi-billion-dollar industry; two of the
game franchises you cite most often, Halo and Grand Theft Auto, have
combined sales of tens of millions of copies. By your very logic,
shouldn't the murder rate across the world, but particularly in the United
States and Japan, have skyrocketed as these games and their ilk became
available? Another thing you have missed in your analysis of the effect
of violent video games is that what measurable effect they do have is
comparable to other socially accepted recreational activities, like
watching a violent or scary movie or playing Paintball. Do you advise the
banning of violent or scary movies, as well? What about Paintball? Or
Laser Tag?

Finally, I would like to address your outright rudeness with those who
dare to challenge your assertions. One online acquaintance of mine was
informed, in no uncertain terms, that gamers do not think, and to imply
such is an oxymoron. Once again, this not only shows ignorance of games
like SimCity or Civilization, which force you to plan out your city or
empire and keep your people happy, it shows a fundamental lack of respect
for people as people. Another, Ryan Hartmann, was told simply to "screw
off." How would the press and the people react if they found out that you
figuratively flipped off anyone that disagreed with you without even
pausing to consider their words? Would that not make you look petty and
ignorant? Would it not demonstrate that you employ the argumentative
tools that you do because you simply have no intellectual leg to stand on?

I look forward to your response.

[My name removed]

Jack's Response #1 (11:26 MT)

Dear Sir: My attacks on Mr. Lowenstein were not ad hominem. You
apparently don't understand what the Latin phrase means. I attacked what
Mr. Lowenstein has done, which is fair game, since that is what he is paid
to do. He did it as a highly-paid lobbyist whose job it is to put a happy
face on an industry some of whose major players mentally molest minors for
money.

I suppose you would also conclude that my criticism of Jeffrey Dahmer's p.r.
firm for what they facilitated, if there were such a thing, would be ad
hominem against them as well. Tell me, was it ad hominen to criticize
Joseph Goebbels because of what he facilitated? Does your insistence upon a
faux sense of courtesy know no bounds?

Mr. Lowenstein is a deceitful person. He is paid to be deceitful. Look at
the industry he represents, whose poster child of irresponsibility just paid
nearly $9 million to the feds for fraud. I haven't herad Mr. Lowenstein
tut-tut about that, have you? He's to busy pretending Easter Eggs are
always things that Peter Cottontail distributes.

When you get a Latin/English dictionary, please let me know.

Oh, and I understand the MPAA ratings as well as you do, having debated Jack
Valenti on the matter years ago, before you became the self-appointed
chairman of the Canadian Courtesy League. Where is Elliot Trudeau when we
need him?

Blessings, Jack Thompson

My Response #1 (13:03 MT)

Dear Sir:

Regarding your first paragraph, perhaps our interpretations of attacking
actions versus people are different, but I did not see anything in the
quoted passage that could be construed as anything other than a personal,
rather than professional attack. Furthermore, the use of the phrase
"mentally molest minors", while certainly a powerful image, has little to
do with the truth of the matter. Any parent who allows their child to
play a game that will disturb them is no better than a parent who allows
their child to watch a movie or read a book that will disburb them; with
that said, however, it is the responsibility of the parent, not the state,
to vet content for their children, as each child is unique in their
maturity and tolerance levels. As for the other definitions given by the
AHD ("interfere with, annoy...subject to unwanted or improper sexual
activity"), none of them are relevant to the situation at hand, so they
are discarded for this discussion.

Your references to Dahmer and Goebbels in the second paragraph are
strawman arguments; I made no such references to either of them, and as
you say, criticism of either of them would be attacking them based on
their actions, something you did not do in the cited passage.

In your third paragraph, you mention Easter eggs: Easter eggs are little
extras that are meant to be found or unlocked by the dedicated player.
They were originally created a generation ago by Atari programmers tired
of not being recognized for their work, so they could get their names in
their games. This is not the same as accessing intentionally blocked-off
code that no player was meant to access, which as I previously stated, is
against the agreement a player explicitly accepts upon installing any
game.

For your point about my misunderstanding of ad hominem, in the first and
fourth paragraphs: it is Latin for "to the man," and in the context of
debating, it is used to describe arguments that attack the person rather
than his actions, arguments, or ideas
(http://modena.intergate.ca/personal/gslj/wordsfromlatin.html#MATH). I've
performed debates in multiple college- and university-level classes, and
I've taken a small amount of Latin as part of a biomedical terminology
course; I know the phrase.

Regarding your final paragraph, I have not appointed myself as anything;
I'm merely rebutting the logical fallacies of your attacks on the
video-game industry. And for the record, his name was PIERRE Elliot
Trudeau. If you're going to name-drop our most famous Prime Minister,
please get his name right.

Jack's Response #1b (12:35 MT) [By this, I mean he's still responding to the original email]

Oh, one more thing: Here's another misreprentation, uttered today, by Doug
Lowenstein, which I just found at www.foxnews.com :

"Video games are protected speech, every bit the same as a movie is
protected or a piece of music or a painting or a photograph," Doug
Lowenstein of the Entertainment Software Association said.

It just so happens that it is a crime in Florida, and in a number of other
states, to sell an R-rated movie ticket to someone under 17. It is also a
crime to sell a photograph in 47 states that depicts sexual activity to a
minor.So Mr. Lowenstein has lied about the alleged absolute protection that
"a movie" has and that photographs allegedly enjoy.

This is typical of Doug. He is paid to lie. He is, in fact, a serial liar.

He is increasingly not very good at it, and those who pay his salary are
learning that. Poor Doug, we hardly knew ye, make-up and all. Jack
Thompson

My Response #1b (13:18 MT)

How do those facts make what Mr. Lowenstein said wrong? There are basic
restrictions on what is suitable only for adults, that apply to all media.
Video games have the AO rating, which is the equivalent of NC-17.
However, few game companies are willing to push hard enough to warrant an
AO rating, for the same reason movie studios are largely unwilling to push
the NC-17 boundary: because stores like Wal-Mart and Target, which provide
a substantial chunk of the industry's earnings, refuse to stock them.
Additionally, every establishment that sells or rents video games that I
have found, both large and small, has some sort of policy restricting
sales of M- and even T-rated games, which again, follows the guidelines of
movies. If the system has a weak link, it's at the level of the parent.
Many of the same parents who won't let their child see an R-rated movie
until they're 17 fail to see that M-rated games can carry the same
objectionable content, and the only reason I can see for this is
ignorance. Perhaps if the ESRB system was as well-recognized as the MPAA
system, this would not be an issue.

Rather than laying blame at the feet of an industry that's catering to its
adult audience as well as its underage one (the Atari and NES generations
are now well over 18; many are pushing 30), why not at least consider the
possibility that the people responsible for safeguarding their own
children simply aren't well-informed enough?

Jack's Response #2 (13:32)

No, M is the equivalent of the R movie rating. Research your facts and stop
bothering me. I have an industry to destroy

My Response #2 (14:12)

Which is implicit in what I said.

"Many of the same parents who won't let their child see an R-rated movie
until they're 17 fail to see that M-rated games can carry the same
objectionable content, and the only reason I can see for this is
ignorance."

I also love that you've stopped pretending you want anything other than
every last video game eradicated from the face of the Earth. Good luck
with that. And I assume by the words "stop bothering me" that you're done
with this debate. Fine by me.

Jack's Response #3 (14:14)

not interested

---

How did this man ever become a lawyer?

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=130274

On Thursday we held the "Drunken Scientists Open", which...yeah, you can guess what that's all about. The course marshall had already given us holy hell once for having people hanging off the sides, but we kind of ignored him, and kept doing it. As we we finished the ninth hole, we were going back to the clubhouse, but I wasn't quite secured yet, and we took the corner going up a hill and I went airborne, landing on the paved cart path. So now I have huge scabs on my knee and elbow, as well as various other cuts and bruises all down by right leg.

Not much point to the story, other than the fact that (a) I'm stupid, and (b) I'm in pain as a result. Let that be your lesson.

In preparation for the arrival of my GBA-SP in the next week or two, I went rooting around my basement for my classic GB--you know, the one they made back in the 80s and early 90s. I only had Tetris and Tetris 2 for it, but hey, it was mine. (Side note: remember the exploding Tetris 2 ads back when the game was released? Heh heh heh...)

Anyway, I had a bit of a foothold on a bin as I was launching myself into the crawlspace, but my foot slipped and I had to step on the boot rack to keep balance. Big mistake, the rack collapsed like a cheap lawn chair, and I got an inch-long cut down my leg. Not a big deal, really--the screw wasn't rusty, and the cut wasn't deep, but it hurt like a beach for a while afterwards. I recovered the GB, chucked the eight-year-old batteries in my carrying case (yes, I bought one of those giant-ass Game Boy-shaped cases), and replaced them with new ones. And yes, Tetris does still own more than fifteen years later. My biggest beef with my Game Boy is how hard it is to see the screen. I've been spoiled by more modern, well-lit screens, so now I'm finding it hard to go back. I remember having a clip-on light for it back in the day, but the bulb died and I tossed it years ago.

So, what's the final message here? Um...I still get to keep my geek card? Some games never die? I'm stupid? I'll leave that up to you.